Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2005 (1) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f this assessee, which was carried out on 23rd Sept., 1994 under s. 133A of the IT Act 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). One truck-load of Raida was found to be unrecorded in the books, which was lying at the place of business of the assessee. The explanation of the assessee that the bill regarding this Raida, which was purchased from M/s Bhagirath Mal Lalchcand, has not yet ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d on CIT(A)'s order and taken same line of arguments, as taken earlier. 5. It is true that at the time of survey, Raida worth Rs. 70,000 was found at the business site for which no bill was with assessee on that date. But it is also a fact that the assessee had stated before AO that this Raida was purchased from M/s Bhagirath Mal Lal Chand, Bhinmal, but at that time the proof was not in his posse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....traction. In my opinion also the finding of CIT(A) does not require any interference. The wrong mention of a firm's name is not materially different which can be inferred otherwise. The addition on the basis of surrender, when the assessee had also claimed one thing, which was proved later on, is not justified. This ground of appeal is dismissed. 7. The next issue relates to deletion of an additi....